The Field of Physics

Off Topic
101

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]chillain wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:
That’s all pretty disappointing lol. I just started reading his stuff as of a few minutes ago.[/quote]

Read it all anyway, spar.

At best, you’ll learn something new and trigger further study on your own.

And at worst, you’ll get some more practice at critical analysis.
[/quote]

This. Read it and read the professional criticisms and read it again (the full CTMU is almost 60 pages if I remember correctly). Since you plan on pursuing a PhD, you need to get used to reading bad scientific articles as well as pseudo-scientific articles because you will see them very often, so getting used to it now and learning how to critically analyze papers will be key to your success.

His use of overly complex wording and sentence structure is a rookie mistake. He knew that his science was flawed and would never pass review so he thought that if he made it too complex sounding and hard to read people would just say fuck it and not read it or bother to tear it apart. The problem is that even if his IQ is 200 or so, that is not much higher then most top scientists, and there are several that can directly rival that and we are very capable and often do break down and dissect bad papers with overly complex wording like his a lot. It will become second nature to you in time.
[/quote]
Yeah after the initial portion, it’s becoming a bit of a chore to digest the subject matter due to his writing style. It seems reminiscent of rambling. I can understand his points, but the bulk of his responses are superfluous and he seems to detail matters of lesser relevance a lot. That’s just the Q&A. Since the full CTMU is 60 pages, I’ll read it in bits so as not to displace time for other activities lol.
[/quote]
Plus I just get bored reading the same thing beyond the first few pages.

102

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
I am a peer leader for fields and waves for engineering students, currently doing research in inorganic chemistry and enjoy philosophy of science pertaining to certain topics in physics in my spare time(as relates to this this topic) even though I am getting my BS in biochemistry even though I have all the credits ready for a BS in chemistry. My younger bro is getting his BS in Physics as well.[/quote]

Not to derail the thread, but what kind of research are you doing in inorganic chem?[/quote]
We are trying to manipulate the redox chemistry between a quadruply bonded metal dimer and a metal center bridged by some ligand, in my case a dimolybdenum unit and ruthenium as a metal center. Most time consuming part is the synthesis though.

103

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
I am a peer leader for fields and waves for engineering students, currently doing research in inorganic chemistry and enjoy philosophy of science pertaining to certain topics in physics in my spare time(as relates to this this topic) even though I am getting my BS in biochemistry even though I have all the credits ready for a BS in chemistry. My younger bro is getting his BS in Physics as well.[/quote]

Not to derail the thread, but what kind of research are you doing in inorganic chem?[/quote]
We are trying to manipulate the redox chemistry between a quadruply bonded metal dimer and a metal center bridged by some ligand, in my case a dimolybdenum unit and ruthenium as a metal center. Most time consuming part is the synthesis though.[/quote]

Very cool. I myself am rather interested in organometallics.

104

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
I am a peer leader for fields and waves for engineering students, currently doing research in inorganic chemistry and enjoy philosophy of science pertaining to certain topics in physics in my spare time(as relates to this this topic) even though I am getting my BS in biochemistry even though I have all the credits ready for a BS in chemistry. My younger bro is getting his BS in Physics as well.[/quote]

Not to derail the thread, but what kind of research are you doing in inorganic chem?[/quote]
We are trying to manipulate the redox chemistry between a quadruply bonded metal dimer and a metal center bridged by some ligand, in my case a dimolybdenum unit and ruthenium as a metal center. Most time consuming part is the synthesis though.[/quote]

Very cool. I myself am rather interested in organometallics.[/quote]
Cool are you doing research or are interested in a certain area of organometallics(like the application of cis-plantin like compounds to treat cancer?)

105

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
I am a peer leader for fields and waves for engineering students, currently doing research in inorganic chemistry and enjoy philosophy of science pertaining to certain topics in physics in my spare time(as relates to this this topic) even though I am getting my BS in biochemistry even though I have all the credits ready for a BS in chemistry. My younger bro is getting his BS in Physics as well.[/quote]

Not to derail the thread, but what kind of research are you doing in inorganic chem?[/quote]
We are trying to manipulate the redox chemistry between a quadruply bonded metal dimer and a metal center bridged by some ligand, in my case a dimolybdenum unit and ruthenium as a metal center. Most time consuming part is the synthesis though.[/quote]

Very cool. I myself am rather interested in organometallics.[/quote]
Cool are you doing research or are interested in a certain area of organometallics(like the application of cis-plantin like compounds to treat cancer?)[/quote]

I am. I’m currently interested in transition metal catalysis and it’s applications towards organic synthesis.

106

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]AquaCruzer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
I am a peer leader for fields and waves for engineering students, currently doing research in inorganic chemistry and enjoy philosophy of science pertaining to certain topics in physics in my spare time(as relates to this this topic) even though I am getting my BS in biochemistry even though I have all the credits ready for a BS in chemistry. My younger bro is getting his BS in Physics as well.[/quote]

Not to derail the thread, but what kind of research are you doing in inorganic chem?[/quote]
We are trying to manipulate the redox chemistry between a quadruply bonded metal dimer and a metal center bridged by some ligand, in my case a dimolybdenum unit and ruthenium as a metal center. Most time consuming part is the synthesis though.[/quote]

Very cool. I myself am rather interested in organometallics.[/quote]
Cool are you doing research or are interested in a certain area of organometallics(like the application of cis-plantin like compounds to treat cancer?)[/quote]

I am. I’m currently interested in transition metal catalysis and it’s applications towards organic synthesis.
[/quote]
Reminds me of work of one of my professors whom students love to imitate his British accent(his work is on organometallics with an emphasis on group 14).

107

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Mutu wrote:
Spar- Panspermia is an interesting theory, and one I can agree with. However, I do not know how feasible it is to say that fully formed microbes are being transported through the universe. I was under the impression that these comets simply transport the organic molecules (such as ammonia, methane) necessary for said microbes to “evolve” from.

However, I watched a recent show on Nat Geo where it was stated that life possibly evolved within comets themselves, as there is great water content stored as ice. They speculated that the cores of these comets are warm enough to allow the water to thaw and as such the organic molecules could float around and interact.

[/quote]
Right. There are a few microbes though that can survive the vacuum of space in something akin to suspended animation … a few.[/quote]

Waterbears FTW

108

Ay

109

[quote]karite36 wrote:
Ay[/quote]
sup

110

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]karite36 wrote:
Ay[/quote]
sup[/quote]

Not much, hear people talking about physics around these parts, decided to listen in. I’m interested but don’t study it.

111

Did someone say biochem??

112

indeed

113

@ Dr. Matt knowing you like futurama I think the episodes with the brain spawn had “Boltzmann brains” as inspiration for those episodes.

114

My phd research is in applied physics although I’m a materials science and engineering student. To Dr. Matt I’m probably the worst kind of imposter :wink: I work on correlated electron systems research, so I’m about half a century behind in terms of theory.

Dr Matt, I’m curious what evidence you refer to w.r.t. extra dimensions? Intuitively I’m inclined to agree with you on this. I understand that we don’t have any rigorous mathematical reason not to accept that they are at least possible, but beyond the mathematical requirements of various theories beyond the Standard Model what sort of evidence is there? Your patience and willingness to explain ideas on here is nothing short of remarkable.

Also, beyond the prospect of gathering further data about the particle-potentially-known-as-Higgs’, what more may we gain from the LHC? Do you think there is good reason to expect relevant information on supersymmetry?

115

I HATE calculus

well not really but it is rather challenging. I am trying to get a grasp on the wave function but it can be slightly daunting.
Biochemistry is way easier.

Dr.Matt what are you currently working on?

116

[quote]NAUn wrote:
My phd research is in applied physics although I’m a materials science and engineering student. To Dr. Matt I’m probably the worst kind of imposter :wink: I work on correlated electron systems research, so I’m about half a century behind in terms of theory.

Dr Matt, I’m curious what evidence you refer to w.r.t. extra dimensions? Intuitively I’m inclined to agree with you on this. I understand that we don’t have any rigorous mathematical reason not to accept that they are at least possible, but beyond the mathematical requirements of various theories beyond the Standard Model what sort of evidence is there? Your patience and willingness to explain ideas on here is nothing short of remarkable.

Also, beyond the prospect of gathering further data about the particle-potentially-known-as-Higgs’, what more may we gain from the LHC? Do you think there is good reason to expect relevant information on supersymmetry?[/quote]

There will always be new information to gather from the LHC; plus, if we abandon the LHC where do we go next for studying sub atomic particle physics?

The Higgs like particle that has been found is an amazing breakthrough, but I find quantum mechanics infinitely more interesting…the fact that small particles can teleport, tunnel, entangle, exist in more than one place, and change by being observed tells us a lot about the fundamental properties of all matter and as such, reality itself, don’t you think?

117

[quote]Mutu wrote:

[quote]NAUn wrote:

The Higgs like particle that has been found is an amazing breakthrough, but I find quantum mechanics infinitely more interesting…[/quote]

These things are not independent of one another. The behavior, or rather our current model of the behavior, of the former is described by the latter.

118

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

[quote]Consul wrote:
So, Dr. Matt, which authors do you recommend for the non-physicist who would like to find out more about physics? [/quote]

Or alternatively what topics, I find making the connection between the mathematical numbers and the concept to clear up the confusion a lot.[/quote]

I would recommend following roughly the same sequence of topics you would cover doing a degree in physics, there is a reason why we teach the classes in that order after all. Start with the standard classical topics: mechanics, electricity and magnetism, waves, light and optics, and thermodynamics. You can get a good outline in these topics through the Physics Demystified series or getting a used physics for scientists and engineers textbook (you can get last generation ones for like 10 bucks on amazon).

If you want to start more advanced topics, you will at the very least have to develop up to elementary skills in differential equations and linear algebra, and there are Demystified books for all these topics or like the physics textbook, you can just get a used last gen textbook (I recommend Stewart for calculus). I would recommend getting both and using the explanations in the Demystified books to help you understand the textbook.

Or if you have a little extra money and some extra time, just take the classes at a community college, most of them offer up to intro to diff eq and linear algebra and up to an intro to modern physics class. Once you get through those topics you should be able to start really understanding topics like quantum mechanics and string theory.

119

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:
I think the most likely way for humans to colonize other worlds would be to develop AI technology to the point AI’s could journey for hundreds of years to another world then prepare it for human life. The AI’s would then need to raise test tube babies and be able to love, educate and otherwise prepare them. The challenges of terraforming another world or genetically modifying humans to live on another world would be staggering but probably more surmountable than living humans making the journey and doing all that.[/quote]

Yeah, but if that was a likely scenario and if there were other intelligent life forms in this here galaxy, this would already have homesteaded the whole galaxy.

Google von Neumann probe, I kid you not. [/quote]

While it’s possible we’re not the only intelligent life in the universe, it’s also possible we’re the most intelligent life in the universe. You also really can’t rely on the reasoning of “if it were possible, someone else would have done it before”. We may end up being the first to homestead the galaxy, even if another lifeform has the technology and capability to do so. The reasoning just doesn’t add up.[/quote]

If just one, just one alien civilization has had the same idea they would have settled this galaxy in 20 million years, i.e, nothing if their probes made around 1% of the speed of light,

Of course I am pulling this all from memory but I believe its in the ballpark.

Could we be the first?

Yes.

I suspect though that we are in for another narcissistic shock, like the earth not being the center of the universe and such.
[/quote]

That is true to an extent, but most advanced topics in any field require years of dedicated study to understand, but in his case he was doing it on purpose in order to sound so smart and to confuse readers to discourage criticism, which didn’t work since he is not the only smart person in the world, and other smart people like myself actually took the time to become experts in our fields and can spot an amateur pretending to be an expert from a mile away.

I did a little research and he did actually did provide his results from an IQ test. He scored a 47 (he is not the only person to do that either) on the Mega test, which would put his IQ at between about 185 and 195. In contrast, I got a 46, the same as Savant, so our ability to learn is about the same, give or take about 10 IQ points, if you think IQ tests mean anything. His abilities are not that far above most top scientists, with the exception that we are actual experts in our fields, that he can claim to understand multiple topics so much better then us that we wouldn’t understand him. It is just absurd and his claims to the contrary are just childish and ruin any credibility he may have had. I really feel sorry for him because if he would take the time to actually dedicate himself to any field and use his ability to learn he could be an expert and have the renown that he expects just for having a high IQ.

120

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

[quote]Consul wrote:
So, Dr. Matt, which authors do you recommend for the non-physicist who would like to find out more about physics? [/quote]

Or alternatively what topics, I find making the connection between the mathematical numbers and the concept to clear up the confusion a lot.[/quote]

I would recommend following roughly the same sequence of topics you would cover doing a degree in physics, there is a reason why we teach the classes in that order after all. Start with the standard classical topics: mechanics, electricity and magnetism, waves, light and optics, and thermodynamics. You can get a good outline in these topics through the Physics Demystified series or getting a used physics for scientists and engineers textbook (you can get last generation ones for like 10 bucks on amazon).

If you want to start more advanced topics, you will at the very least have to develop up to elementary skills in differential equations and linear algebra, and there are Demystified books for all these topics or like the physics textbook, you can just get a used last gen textbook (I recommend Stewart for calculus). I would recommend getting both and using the explanations in the Demystified books to help you understand the textbook.

Or if you have a little extra money and some extra time, just take the classes at a community college, most of them offer up to intro to diff eq and linear algebra and up to an intro to modern physics class. Once you get through those topics you should be able to start really understanding topics like quantum mechanics and string theory.
[/quote]

I’m aiming to take a calculus course next semester (I don’t need it for my program requirements but want to do it regardless).
Have you ever seen the Khan academy videos on youtube? what do you think of those to cover the mathematical portion of the recommended learning?

My father is a mechanical engineer so I do have a ton of textbooks in the basement here that he left behind to work through to add to my physics classes i’ve taken so far.